» Breaking and Entering

One CHARGE DROPPED, Other CHARGE, Continued with no Conviction (CWOF)  

May 22nd 2019
Breaking and Entering in the Nighttime to Commit a Felony
Assault and Battery on person Disabled/Over 60
Client was a hardworking father who came from out-of-state to see a country concert at Gillette Stadium. He saw the concert and much more. He became intoxicated, very intoxicated and was rummaging through what he thought was his friend’s car only to find out that it was not. The owner of the vehicle confronted him, and a fight ensued and he, according to police struck the man several times. The man whose vehicle it was very angry (understandably). The victim was and continued to be upset as the nearly year-long case traveled through the court system. The district attorney had been having sought convictions for the entire year as the case proceeded though the court. Something we were unwilling to consider. The case was marked up for trial and the defendant and accuser and others negotiated with moments before the jury was to be selected. After a long discussion with the accuser, Attorney Barabino, client, client’s wife and the accuser shook hands and client apologized for what was a major mistake that should not have happened-but did. The accuser was gracious, respectful and decent. In the end, we negotiated a full-dismissal of the breaking and entering charge and an agreement for a deferred judgement for a year which if he accomplishes probation, the case will be dismissed from his record. The deferred judgment is technically called a continued without a finding or “CWOF” so that the person admits to the acts, but a judgment of guilty is withheld pending completion of probation requirement. The condition of probation was anger management and a three-thousand-dollar restitution payment.
RESULT: One CHARGE DROPPED, Other CHARGE, Continued with no Conviction (CWOF)

Malicious Destruction of Property, Breaking and Entering Nighttime, Larceny in Building, CASE DISMISSED

March 27th 2015
Malicious Destruction of Property
Breaking and Entering in the Nighttime for Felony
Larceny in Building
Client was a young, hard working juvenile who was polite, respectful, and an excellent student. According to police, he went into school late at night without permission and acted irresponsibility. This was an unacceptable act and inconsistent with his good tempered disposition and attitude. He was charged with felony offenses and the Commonwealth had a fairly strong case. Admitting to any of these types of offenses was unacceptable. Nevertheless, after several months of investigation and negotiation, Attorney Barabino today persuaded the prosecutor and the judge to place client on pre-trial probation for two months. As long as client refrains from committing any further offenses and pays back the money to the school for the damage, this case will be dismissed. No admission to any criminal act, misdemeanor, or felony.
RESULT: Sentencing Memorandum FILED, CASE DISMISSED.

Breaking and Entering, MOTION TO SUPPRESS FILED, CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL

September 5th 2013
Breaking and Entering Building Nighttime for Felony Chapter 266 Section 16
Breaking and Entering Building Nighttime for Felony Chapter 266 Section 16
Client was a high school student with supportive and loving parents. Client and another young man snuck out and entered some vehicles in the nighttime. The evidence was clear—they were seen on videotape and the police found them at the car. Eventually, Attorney Barabino presented the court with a motion to suppress statements made by the Defendant. Negotiations were triggered and offers made. The District Attorney agreed to reduce from felony to misdemeanors—and agreed to a probation term that allowed for a case to be dismissed at the end of the probation. We could do better—we had to do better. After nearly seven months of litigating the case---we respectfully declined this otherwise well-intentioned and reasonable offer. The reason we declined is two-fold. One, if he violates probation during the next year he could be found guilty. He could receive a “CWOF” or continued without a finding, which can be considered for many jobs as the equivalent of a guilty verdict since unlawful conduct is admitted. In the end, an already reasonable District Attorney agreed to pre-trial probation with conditions so this young man could truthfully admit he had never admitted to any criminal activity.
RESULT: Motion to SUPPRESS, FILED. CASE DISMISSED, with conditions of remaining in therapy and completing 50 hours of community service.

Assault and Battery, Breaking and Entering, Vandalizing Property, Intimidation of a Witness, Assault with a Dangerous Weapon, FIVE OUT OF SIX CHARGES DROPPED, MISDEMEANOR DISMISSAL

May 24th 2012
Assault and Battery Chapter 265 Section 15?
Breaking and Entering in the Nighttime for Felony Chapter 266 Section 16
Vandalize Property Chapter 266 Section 126A
Vandalize Property Chapter 266 Section 126A
Intimidation of a Witness Chapter 268 Section 13b
Assault with a Dangerous Weapon Chapter 265 Section 15B
Client was a laid off manufacturing employee who had a rocky relationship with his daughter’s mother. According to police and his police record, client has been accused of assaulting her in the past. In fact, she and her child were placed in a residential location paid for via the Commonwealth based on her alleged fear of client. On this occasion, daughter's mother claimed that client was able to locate her from an unknown source and when he knocked on her door he pushed himself in the room. Once inside the room, he held her down on the bed and punched her twice in the face. After this struggle, the report stated that he broke two telephones and assaulted her child. Once over, he left the premises and she, exhausted and out of breath, called 911. She informed the police of what had occurred and they placed a warrant out for client's arrest. Once arrested, a separate hearing was requested from the District Attorney’s office called a 58A. The purpose of the 58A was to see if bail should even be a consideration in this case. The District Attorney was successful and client was detained until trial. Attorney Barabino and his client had one alternative for the District Attorney to consider. That was drop all the charges or fill in the jury box. No deal was reached. Defense knew that what alleged victims had told police could be defended in court and there was another story to be told. At the day of trial, Attorney Barabino and his client rejected all offers for a deal. However, as the trial was moments away from beginning, there was one offer client could not say no too. The offer was to drop five of the six charges in their entirety and the one charge of assault and battery to continue without a finding, which simply means the if client completes the term of probation the one charge will be dismissed.
RESULT: FIVE OUT OF SIX CHARGES DROPPED. CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL OF MISDEMEANOR.